>but did drive an '04 Malibu with the V-6 on a GM-sponsored test course. Honestly, I hated the handling.
I hate to bring it up, giving food for trolls, but the Malibu market is not primarily to people who love the sport of driving and having a car that reacts, tracks, handles, at the slightly request. It's bought by a lot of "older folks" in this area. The handling of the base car is probably oriented toward their likes.
Did you drive a Maxx. Isn't that sportier? And the SS? Comparing to Camry is a little like comparing it to Buick.
was just a V-6 sedan, not a Maxx. I can't remember if it was an LS or LT, and the SS wasn't out back then. And to be fair, a closed test course like this really isn't a good way to judge a car's overall capability. It's quite possible that they have the bugs worked out of that electric steering so that it's faster and more responsive.
One thing that did impress me about the Malibu though, is that I thought it felt roomier and more comfy up front than the Camry. At least comparing models with manual seat adjustments. But these days, power seats are so common that I'm guessing most likely my next car would have them. And while the Malibu still gets ragged on for a cheap interior, I'd at least call it "tolerable". Much better than the '03 and older model.
I have a feeling that if I do get another car anytime soon, it'll be a used one that's 1-2 years old. So most likely I'd be going domestic, since they tend to be a better used value than Japanese brands. Even if the Japanese car is better, I'm just getting to the point that I don't want to blow big wads of money on a new car.
I think there is a bias in the media, and if I may, I would like to use Consumer Reports as an example.
Most people equate a recall with a "bad" car. In my opinion, CR has never done anything to challenge this assumption when the recalls were for domestic products. In fact, I would say CR has always used the number of recalls as proof that a vehicle was "bad".
But, in the past issue, they have a mini- article about how a vehicle having a recall isn't really a bad thing, (!) This because all of a sudden, the Prius has been recalled. I was floored to find CR publishing an article like this. I can only assume that in the future, they will no longer hold the fact that a car has been recalled against any manufacturer.
The only new American car I ever owned was a 95 Ford Windstar. After 80000 miles and three sets of blown head gaskets, I had enough,I bought a Toyota Camry. Ford eventually paid for the repairs to my van, but it was still off of the road for a week each time. My Windstar drove great and still looked new inside and out, but was let down by the unreliable mechanicals. The American car companies should take a hint from Hyundai and offer a 100,000 mile warranty while they get serious about reliability.
GM just not nimble or quick enough to react to market swings
A big part of the reason GM is in the fix they're in is that the company reacts with the same speed of turning an ocean liner.
"We just couldn't react," Rick Wagoner, GM's CEO said in an interview last week with Automotive News. "It really highlighted that the underpinnings of our business are too fragile. So if we lose mix or volume, we cannot get costs down as fast as (sales) volume comes down."
The question that comes to my mind is: Toyota is just as large (if not soon to be larger) than GM. If they (and other large car companies) can react to market changes quickly, why can't GM?
This is the job of marketing. Keep on top of things and give production a direction. Hell this is GM's home market and they've been here for a nearly century. They are flailing around and HonYota and even Hyundai are running circles around them. Does nobody there have any new ideas except 'Let's go back to the 60's'. Wagoner doesnt seem to think that they do.
Could be a smokescreen for killing off the entire marketing dept as a cost cutting measure too. they sure arent earning their pay.
>they will no longer hold the fact that a car has been recalled against any manufacturer.
The mea culpa was because the Prius is from, Toyota, a beloved manufacturer of wonderful vehicles. I would expect the tone of discussion of their articles, as always, to express their concern about recalls for the manufacturers they don't like and their love for the ones they do like. Slightly negative when GM has a recall; positive words around the recall mention when HoToy has a recall.
GM, Ford and Chrysler have to do 5 things before they are accepted back into to the good graces of the car buying public:
1) Make quality cars especially in materials and workmanship to make it look good inside and good fit and finish.
2) Build cars that are stylish and have a design that people can identify, look at Porsche, you can tell its a Porsche just from the outlines, you dont even have to get up close.
3)Reliabitlity in even the most minor parts that can cause unneeded headaches. This is were the Japanese excel, even to the point of overbuilding so bearings, switches, locks keep working way past 100-200k without a problem.
4) Have a solid price leader that the mainstream of car buyers can afford and gives the company a star like the Honda Civic instead of the black eye of the Chevy Cavalier.
5) An most importantly offer a solid warranty and service that says we make a great product and we back it up even to the point of replacing a car if it does turn out to be a cerified lemon.
Doing these basic points would take the Big 3 a long way down the road back to credibility in the eyes of most American car buyers....
GM, Ford and Chrysler have to do 5 things before they are accepted back into to the good graces of the car buying public:
1) Make quality cars especially in materials and workmanship to make it look good inside and especially outside a good fit and finish.
2) Build cars that are stylish and have a design that people can identify, look at Porsche, you can tell its a Porsche just from the outlines, you dont even have to get up close. This brings in lookers who may turn into buyers, you have to get them in the showroom or you can never make the sale.
3) Reliability in even the most minor parts that can cause unneeded headaches. This is were the Japanese excel, even to the point of overbuilding so bearings, switches, locks keep working way past 100-200k without a problem.
4) Have a solid price leader that the mainstream of car buyers can afford and gives the company a star like the Honda Civic instead of the black eye of the Chevy Cavalier. This also brings in lookers who turn into buyers and they may even go up the line and buy the next model up.
5) An most importantly offer a solid warranty and service that says we make a great product and we back it up even to the point of replacing a car if it does turn out to be a certified lemon.
Doing these basic points would take the Big 3 a long way down the road back to credibility in the eyes of most American car buyers....
>3)Reliabitlity in even the most minor parts that can cause unneeded headaches. This is were the Japanese excel, even to the point of overbuilding so bearings, switches, locks keep working way past 100-200k without a problem.
This of course includes all the many transmission problems in Honda's various models, Toyota's sluding motors, VW's sluding turbo motors, VW's falling windows as examples of how to build the cars? Not to mention all the Accord problems starting with 03-read the Accord problems discussion for a full list of problems: popping unibody, brakes, steering, rattles in A-pillar and others, etc.
Let's check reality here. JD Powers shows improved design and reliability in 90 day to 3 year studies for GM. Check Honda's listing.
Please, my Honda Accord is sitting outside problem free with 220k with all original parts except the alternator and the usual belts, hoses, filters.........
advertising in the Advocate or whatever shows Ford is bowing down to any group. That's just simple marketing, and no different from advertising in Ebony, Sports Illustrated, Family Circle, Woman's Day, Country Living, Rednex Quarterly, or any publication that caters to a specific group of people, whether that group is based on sex, race, lifestyle, etc.
However, PULLING out your advertising from a specific group because another group wants to whine about it IS bowing down. And is almost enough to make me want to go put one of those "Republicans and [non-permissible content removed] and Christians, Oh My!" bumper stickers on my car!
I don't see how advertising in the Advocate or whatever shows Ford is bowing down to any group.
It is when for whatever reason Ford decides to stop advertising in those publications (the reason is immaterial at this point) and certain groups those publications are aimed at put pressure on Ford to reverse that decision. Ford changed its position because a specific group was whining about it.
Bowing to pressure is bowing to pressure.
That is unless you believe its ok for a "politically correct" group to do it but not a "politically incorrect" group.
Bumper stickers work both ways you know.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Bravo to Ford indeed. Maybe they simply realized that a gay boycott could cost them more than a boycott by the psychopathic fundies at AFA. It could all be simple economics...
I always followed my grandfather's example when it came to car purchases. I even brought him with me when I made my first car purchase when I was 16. Here's a list of the cars he's owned:
1941 Chevrolet Special Deluxe 1947 Hudson Commodore 8 1953 Plymouth Cambridge 1961 Plymouth Valiant 1964 Chevrolet Biscayne 1967 Chevrolet Bel Air 1974 Chevrolet Impala 1980 Chevrolet Impala 1989 Chevrolet Caprice Classic Brougham
Yes, let's keep it in perspective here. The problems with the Japanese vehicles you mentioned occured in such small numbers they were merely a drop in the bucket compared to the reliability and build quality problems the big 3 have had over the last several decades with almost all of their vehicles. I agree with the topic starter that what the big 3 need to do is to match or exceed the reliability and build quality of the Japanese if they want their companies to flurish. Until that happens, they will continue to dwindle.
...the number of Japanese cars sold in the past was small compared to those from the Big Three. I'm sure, if they sold in the same number as domestic makes, you would hear a LOT more bad stories about them. I'm sure we will be hearing a lot more bad stories about them now and in the future as their numbers increase.
You couldn't convince me to buy a Camry any more than I could convince you to buy a Buick. I wouldn't buy a Camry if it came with a glovebox full of free gold bullion and the Playboy Playmate of my choice.
you DO realize that a glovebox full of gold bullion would be the equivalent of them paying you thousands and thousands of dollars to take a Camry?
If they paid me $50,000, I would take a free Buick and drive it for any previously agreed-on period of time up to expiration of the warranty. Then give it away and use my $50K and change to buy a new IS250 manual and a Tacoma crew cab.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You couldn't convince me to buy a Camry any more than I could convince you to buy a Buick. I wouldn't buy a Camry if it came with a glovebox full of free gold bullion and the Playboy Playmate of my choice.
Playboy Playmate of your choice and you still would not buy a Camry. Are you that afraid that she would not want to be seen in an oldman-Buick and you would always have to drive your Playmate in a Toyota. What would your friends think?
Look jokes aside, its a fact that Ford and GM are loosing market share. This market share is taken by Honda and Toyota. This means that current owners of Gm and Ford do not wish to purchase another domestic car and they purchase an import. This is a simple fact. If all owners of domestics again purchased a domestic there would not be any market share loss. Its that simple.
Now I am sure that Toyota does not give away a free Playmate with every Camry purchase, so they must have found another way to convince domestic owners that their cars are better. Build quality and resale value are two very convincing arguments to most people.
Now I am sure that Toyota does not give away a free Playmate with every Camry purchase, so they must have found another way to convince domestic owners that their cars are better.
Lemme tell ya if they did the bimmer would be gone and I'd be frantically trying to explain my newtoy accompanying the ugly camry I bought.
the Playmate's twin sister and her good looking mother, I might be tempted. :shades:
Actually, all the domestics need to do to get me to buy an American brand is to make something that catches my eye more than its foreign competition. Now I know that probably doesn't sound hard to do, considering that I've only had domestics in the past. But the main things that would have traditionally kept me out of an imports were the size and the price. Usually domestics just gave you more bang, and more poundage, for the buck.
These days though, the Japanese make a whole slew of cars that fit me comfortably, while the domestics, oddly, seem to make fewer. And price-wise, they're much closer. For example, my old 1985 Consumer Guide has a test of a Camry and a Pontiac Parisienne. The Camry was fully-loaded and had a tepid 2.0 4-cyl, and a sticker price as tested of over $14k. The Parisienne stickered somewhere around $15K, and Consumer Guide said it was literally a lot of car for the money. There's no way in hell you could have convinced me in 1985 to fork over that kind of money for a Camry, versus a full-sized Pontiac! And they were just totally different cars.
Today though, a Camry really doesn't sticker (or TMV) for much more than a Malibu. And it's close enough in size, IMO, to be a worthy alternative to the larger Impala. For better or worse, times have changed.
Grandpop liked those full-size, body-on-frame, V-8 battletanks. That's the one thing GM was consistently good at building. They ran into trouble when they tried building different kinds of cars (rear engine, V6s and I4s, FWD, composite interiors).
Funny. I wouldn't buy either a Malibu or a Camry. I can't think of the Malibu as a Camry competitor either because it seems smaller - more like a Corolla competitor. The styling makes the car seem smaller than it is.
As for that 1985 Parisienne - well, that's exactly the kind of car I'd go for!
Just about ALL domestic cars are more eye-appealing to me than anything Japanese. The Japanese cars, (and trucks) always had this bizarre look that reminded me of their weird movie monsters. Even bland cars like the Camry and Accord aren't free of this disturbing look. About the only car they make that I find remotely attractive is the LS430, probably because it apes a Mercedes S-Class so well.
YOU GET MY POINT VERY WELL in my post number 594. You worded the solution very well. Get more Americans to have a more positive view of America itself. American cars are an icon, and represent America itself to a significant degree. It's partly a perceptual issue.
I think that you nailed it here. The BIG V8 powered body on frame cars were always the strength of Big 2. Come to think of it, thats what SUVs are. I think the problem is that domestics never really learned how to build a good unibody car with a small V6. Sure Ford Taurus was revolutionary when it came out, but for most part domestic unibody cars are a step behind the competition. Why is that? Well I thought of a few things.
Most of the development money went into trucks and SUVs. I think that its strange that Lincoln Town Car and Ford CV still have live rear axle while Explorer and Expedition have IRS. Does that even make sense to anyone here. A luxury car like Town Car riding on a solid rear axle, while a low level midsize SUV has independent rear suspension. Even the engines tell the story. Lincoln with an old 240 HP 2 valves engine while the Explorer gets the new 300HP 3-valve engine. I mean who thinks of this stuff at Ford? Hello McFly!!!
Lack of new platforms also tell the story. Look Ford cannot develop a new FWD platform by it self. Ford Taurus is still sold based on the old platform. The new Ford 500 is based on Volvo S80 platform, while Ford Fusion is based on Mazda 6 platform. So the last Ford NA platform developed in house is Taurus. This means that in 20 years Ford could not develop an in-house modern FWD platform. GM is no better in this regard. The All NEW Chevy Impala and Buick LaCrosse are both still riding on a modified W platform introduced in 1988 as Buick Regal. The New Buick Lucerne is still based on the old G-Platform which was introduced in 1995 as Old Aurora.
The minivan investment was even less from Ford and GM then sedans. Does Ford realy think that Ford Freestar is modern minivan that people would want to buy? Does GM realy think that grafting a big nose on an old minivan make it a better seller? The new GM minivans look like a Platypus. You would think that GM learned a lesson with Pontiac Aztec.
Well, GM's G-body has been upgraded for the 2006 Lucerne/DTS. It is not the same as the so called "old" platform used on the 1995 Aurora. This platform is not a bad design and is still competitive I think. The newer RWD sigma platform is not obviously much better in terms of refinement (Noise, Vibration, Harshness). The sigma platform is much better for handling, which is what the CTS, STS and SRX are designed for.
I do think that GM needs to develop a good RWD replacement platform for the G-platform. This was underway but the zeta platform was trying to cover too many different models to do any of them right.
Your point is well made, but the single most important part of buying a new car is the test drive.
Is the Malibu better than the Camry in the test drive?
Myself, I recently was in the market for a new car... and I wanted a small hatchback with good handling, good power, and seats that supported my back for about $20,000.
I narrowed the choices down to:
Ford Focus Mazda 3 Volkswagen Golf (GTI) Hyundai Elantra Kia Spectra5 Pontiac Vibe (Toyota Matrix) Suzuki Aerio SX
After test driving them, I had to eliminate the Hyundai, Kia, Suzuki, Pontiac/Toyota, and the Golf as they were all underpowered and had, in my view, poor handling.
The Ford Focus was chopped because of the hideously cheap interior.
So it boiled down to the Mazda3 and the Volkswagen GTI.
And they were nearly identical. However, I finally made my choice because I could not look over my shoulder and see into the blind spot in the Mazda3... so I bought the GTI.
Research-wise, the Mazda3 is actually a little better (pricing and passenger room), but the test drive came out in favor of the GTI.
So the Malibu may well be the better car on paper, but does the test drive bear that out?
the domestics have been building unibody cars for a long, long time. In fact, Chrysler actually coined that word in 1960!
The GM G-body platform that sls002 mentioned is a VERY sturdy platform. Nice, rigid, solid and safe. I think the problem ends up coming up in the details. trim pieces, interior parts, the occasional outdated engine, and so forth. The platform itself served as a very competitive basis, but then what GM did to it for the finishing touches often left something to be desired.
Another example is the W-body. If there's one thing my Dad's '03 Regal has going for it, is that it feels like a solid, substantial car. It's just in need of a nicer interior, better fit and finish, better suspension (to be fair, his is a base model) etc.
Supposedly the 1996 Taurus, ridiculed that it is, was a very solid platform when it debuted. I think NHTSA or one of those crash-test organizations said that it was one of the most solid, safe cars they'd tested up to that point.
I'm guessing that the problem is most likely that these cars get designed to a certain spec, but then the bean counters step in and start cutting costs, and the end result is somewhat less than what the original designers would have preferred.
I think that the W-platform has a fairly stiff body stucture too, not quite as stiff as the G-platform, but quite good. For the current models (Impala, Grand Prix and LaCrosse), there were improvements or refinements.
Should have bought the Malibu rather than the GTI as you will rue the day you ever laid eyes on anything Volkswagen, my close friend (after inumberable problems) just took his back and handed the keys to the dealer and took a rather nasty hit on it rather than continue the pain.......
Chrysler may have coined the word "Unibody" but wasn't Nash first? I also seem to recall the 1958-60 Lincolns were also unitized. I remember seeing pictures of lucite models for 1960 Dodge and Plymouth bodies used to engineer the Unibody. Were all Chrysler products, save the Imperial, unit-bodied from 1960 on? Was my 1985 Chrysler Fifth Avenue a Unibody?
I don't want to rain on your parade and I hope your experience with VW is better than the ones I've had. VW is the perfect car for the masochist who is too proud for whips and chains.
i've owned a VW before. I'd rather an 06 GTI (3k lbs, 200hp/207 tq, easily chipped, superb interior, DSG great handling) over some pathetic Malibu. No comparison really.
FWIW, my VW ownership experience was not good. I'd still pick a VW product over a boring, low rent American car (is there another kind?).
I think the problem is that domestics never really learned how to build a good unibody car with a small
I know what you are trying to say, but all of the Mopars of the 60's and beyond were unibody and many, even the full size ones, had the excellent slant six engine. I believe that the last v8 powered Mopar car was built in 1989. I feel that the American consumer's tastes have moved away from what was considered an "American" car style (big, soft, inefficient, poor resale value) to the "Import" car style (smaller, tighter, more efficient, good resale value). This may be just a maturation of the consumer, but the Domestic auto makers had sure better catch up and give the consumer what they want.
there were a lot of cars that were unitized before Chrysler. It was actually pretty common among European cars, IIRC. Before the term "Unibody" was coined, I think the design was often called "monococque" or "Aircraft-designed", or other phrases.
Chrysler switched all of their cars except Imperial to Unibody for 1960, and Imperial switched for 1967. Most unitized cars don't forsake the frame completely, contrary to popular belief. While they don't have a full, separate frame underneath that the car body sits on, most of them still have to utilize a front sub-frame, which supports the engine and suspension, and a rear sub-frame, which supports the rear axle. While these sub-frames will differ from car to car, and among manufacturers, I think most unitized cars still have to make do with a sub-frame of some sorts.
Lemko, your 5th Avenue was unitized, although I don't know if Chrysler was still calling them "Unibody". It can be deceiving though to look up underneath one, because the beefy front and rear sub-frames to give the illusion of a body-on-frame car. The front sub-frame is also isolated from the body with these big rubber mounts, which are supposed to give the car a softer ride. Those isolated subframes can be troublesome though as the rubber mounts age and deteriorate. My '79 Newport had an isolated subframe too, and two of the mounts were just about gone. It really gave the car an uneasy feeling, because those rotten mounts would let the body shift about on the sub-frame when you went around corners, accelerated, braked, and such.
For some reason though, the problem was more rampant on the R-bodies than the M-bodies. If nothing else it was a learning experience. Before I bought my '79 NYer, the first thing I checked out was those sub-frame mounts!
I have a buddy with a 2001.5 Passat, and it hasn't been too bad. I think he has around 90,000 miles on it. A couple years ago it went through a little spat where it would refuse to start sometimes. It took the dealer several months and many attempts to find out what the problem was. I think it ended up being a neutral safety switch or something else minor. I'd blame that little incident more on the dealership than the car, though. While the car started it, the dealership exacerbated it.
I had another friend with a 2002 or so Jetta that dumped its load of coolant before he made the first payment on it.
Oh, how that bought back memories! A buddy of mine in high school had an ancient Dodge Dart with the pushbutton automatic transmission and the 225 slant six.
It always reminded my of "Dino" from the Flintstones when he started that car...(say it rapidly, in a high voice): ne, ne, ne, ne!
You guys would really take the pain for a VW, whipped and tied to the whipping post of the service racks and salt rubbed in hard from the cheerful service techs, just so you could experience a few fleeting moments of twisties and a few miles of shifting before it broke down.......
Wow, for you who are about to choose the S & M of VW we salute you........
You guys would really take the pain for a VW, whipped and tied to the whipping post of the service racks and salt rubbed in hard from the cheerful service techs, just so you could experience a few fleeting moments of twisties and a few miles of shifting before it broke down.......
Wow, for you who are about to choose the S & M of VW we salute you........
My BMW 330i has been far more unreliable than my Jetta ever was...and BMW's e90 is still the car to beat for my next purchase in May. Second car on the list - of those I've driven - is the A3. The 06/07 GTI when I get a chance to drive it will probably be no. 2 or no 3.
Not my fault Japanese and American cars are so boring. I'll take fun, nice and unreliable over boring, bland and reliable.
Lets see, i slide into a car and turn it on. At this point, the drive should be a pleasure. I should be able to cruise at 95 mph to Vegas in serene comfort and get 30+ mpg. I should arrive and feel fine, rested, comfy.
Truth be told most cars that wouldn't happen. The ride wouldn't be smooth, secure, locked down and serene at 95 mph while giving me adequate power to pass and allowing me to maintain over 30 mpg. Most cars - japanese and american - simply don't feel rock solid and composed at those speeds and certainly not for 3-4 hours at a time.
Pain = driving a car that's boring, driving something that's loud, that feels floaty, that drifts at 100 mph plus, that doesn't offer supportive seating. Pain is not loving the driving experience.
All of this discussion of Chrysler unibody made in 1960 has no relevance to this topic. Remember Chrysler almost went bankrupt with those unibody cars. It was not until K-Cars that Chrysler even attempted to build a modern car. Can I do that? Can I really call K-Cars modern? Well modern for its time anyway.
I am talking about a modern FWD platform that can compete with Camry and Accord. I think every body here agrees that making small changes to an existing platforms will not save GM and will not stop it’s market loss. The main problem with current GM platforms is that they are simply not space efficient. The days of big on outside, small on inside designs are gone. GM has to come up with something a lot better then current cars to have any hope of survival. At least Ford understood that they have a problem and came up with two new platforms.
I think that Ford Fusion is a much much better product then Malibu and 500 is a much much much better product then LaCrosse.
GM has to understand one very simple thing. What they are doing now does not work. It’s a simple statement. If what they were doing worked, then they would not be in this mess. So they have to change what they are doing. Making small changes to existing cars and giving them new names is not going to cut it. GM needs to come up with a fresh approach. Look GM's fortunes stated to go down hill when they switched to FWD cars.
Why GM cannot build a decent RWD car. Yes I mean a proper Chevy Impala based on modified Sigma platform. I think that there would be many takers for a RWD Impala with V8 engine for $30K. This is something that Japanese just don't offer.
GM and Ford have to understand they cannot make a FWD sedan as good as Camry or Accord. It’s just not their cup of tea. So they have to make something truly American. To me a truly American car is a full size RWD V8 car that is affordable. I am talking about a GM version of Chrysler 300.
Comments
I hate to bring it up, giving food for trolls, but the Malibu market is not primarily to people who love the sport of driving and having a car that reacts, tracks, handles, at the slightly request. It's bought by a lot of "older folks" in this area. The handling of the base car is probably oriented toward their likes.
Did you drive a Maxx. Isn't that sportier? And the SS? Comparing to Camry is a little like comparing it to Buick.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Same as the one who misspells Desoto and LeSabre!!! :P :P :P :P :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
One thing that did impress me about the Malibu though, is that I thought it felt roomier and more comfy up front than the Camry. At least comparing models with manual seat adjustments. But these days, power seats are so common that I'm guessing most likely my next car would have them. And while the Malibu still gets ragged on for a cheap interior, I'd at least call it "tolerable". Much better than the '03 and older model.
I have a feeling that if I do get another car anytime soon, it'll be a used one that's 1-2 years old. So most likely I'd be going domestic, since they tend to be a better used value than Japanese brands. Even if the Japanese car is better, I'm just getting to the point that I don't want to blow big wads of money on a new car.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Most people equate a recall with a "bad" car. In my opinion, CR has never done anything to challenge this assumption when the recalls were for domestic products. In fact, I would say CR has always used the number of recalls as proof that a vehicle was "bad".
But, in the past issue, they have a mini- article about how a vehicle having a recall isn't really a bad thing, (!) This because all of a sudden, the Prius has been recalled. I was floored to find CR publishing an article like this. I can only assume that in the future, they will no longer hold the fact that a car has been recalled against any manufacturer.
A big part of the reason GM is in the fix they're in is that the company reacts with the same speed of turning an ocean liner.
"We just couldn't react," Rick Wagoner, GM's CEO said in an interview last week with Automotive News. "It really highlighted that the underpinnings of our business are too fragile. So if we lose mix or volume, we cannot get costs down as fast as (sales) volume comes down."
The question that comes to my mind is: Toyota is just as large (if not soon to be larger) than GM. If they (and other large car companies) can react to market changes quickly, why can't GM?
This is the job of marketing. Keep on top of things and give production a direction. Hell this is GM's home market and they've been here for a nearly century. They are flailing around and HonYota and even Hyundai are running circles around them. Does nobody there have any new ideas except 'Let's go back to the 60's'. Wagoner doesnt seem to think that they do.
Could be a smokescreen for killing off the entire marketing dept as a cost cutting measure too. they sure arent earning their pay.
The mea culpa was because the Prius is from, Toyota, a beloved manufacturer of wonderful vehicles. I would expect the tone of discussion of their articles, as always, to express their concern about recalls for the manufacturers they don't like and their love for the ones they do like. Slightly negative when GM has a recall; positive words around the recall mention when HoToy has a recall.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
1) Make quality cars especially in materials and workmanship to make it look good inside and good fit and finish.
2) Build cars that are stylish and have a design that people can identify, look at Porsche, you can tell its a Porsche just from the outlines, you dont even have to get up close.
3)Reliabitlity in even the most minor parts that can cause unneeded headaches. This is were the Japanese excel, even to the point of overbuilding so bearings, switches, locks keep working way past 100-200k without a problem.
4) Have a solid price leader that the mainstream of car buyers can afford and gives the company a star like the Honda Civic instead of the black eye of the Chevy Cavalier.
5) An most importantly offer a solid warranty and service that says we make a great product and we back it up even to the point of replacing a car if it does turn out to be a cerified lemon.
Doing these basic points would take the Big 3 a long way down the road back to credibility in the eyes of most American car buyers....
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
1) Make quality cars especially in materials and workmanship to make it look good inside and especially outside a good fit and finish.
2) Build cars that are stylish and have a design that people can identify, look at Porsche, you can tell its a Porsche just from the outlines, you dont even have to get up close. This brings in lookers who may turn into buyers, you have to get them in the showroom or you can never make the sale.
3) Reliability in even the most minor parts that can cause unneeded headaches. This is were the Japanese excel, even to the point of overbuilding so bearings, switches, locks keep working way past 100-200k without a problem.
4) Have a solid price leader that the mainstream of car buyers can afford and gives the company a star like the Honda Civic instead of the black eye of the Chevy Cavalier. This also brings in lookers who turn into buyers and they may even go up the line and buy the next model up.
5) An most importantly offer a solid warranty and service that says we make a great product and we back it up even to the point of replacing a car if it does turn out to be a certified lemon.
Doing these basic points would take the Big 3 a long way down the road back to credibility in the eyes of most American car buyers....
This of course includes all the many transmission problems in Honda's various models, Toyota's sluding motors, VW's sluding turbo motors, VW's falling windows as examples of how to build the cars? Not to mention all the Accord problems starting with 03-read the Accord problems discussion for a full list of problems: popping unibody, brakes, steering, rattles in A-pillar and others, etc.
Let's check reality here. JD Powers shows improved design and reliability in 90 day to 3 year studies for GM. Check Honda's listing.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
However, PULLING out your advertising from a specific group because another group wants to whine about it IS bowing down. And is almost enough to make me want to go put one of those "Republicans and [non-permissible content removed] and Christians, Oh My!" bumper stickers on my car!
Bravo to Ford for not giving in to them.
It is when for whatever reason Ford decides to stop advertising in those publications (the reason is immaterial at this point) and certain groups those publications are aimed at put pressure on Ford to reverse that decision. Ford changed its position because a specific group was whining about it.
Bowing to pressure is bowing to pressure.
That is unless you believe its ok for a "politically correct" group to do it but not a "politically incorrect" group.
Bumper stickers work both ways you know.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
1941 Chevrolet Special Deluxe
1947 Hudson Commodore 8
1953 Plymouth Cambridge
1961 Plymouth Valiant
1964 Chevrolet Biscayne
1967 Chevrolet Bel Air
1974 Chevrolet Impala
1980 Chevrolet Impala
1989 Chevrolet Caprice Classic Brougham
You couldn't convince me to buy a Camry any more than I could convince you to buy a Buick. I wouldn't buy a Camry if it came with a glovebox full of free gold bullion and the Playboy Playmate of my choice.
If they paid me $50,000, I would take a free Buick and drive it for any previously agreed-on period of time up to expiration of the warranty. Then give it away and use my $50K and change to buy a new IS250 manual and a Tacoma crew cab.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Playboy Playmate of your choice and you still would not buy a Camry. Are you that afraid that she would not want to be seen in an oldman-Buick and you would always have to drive your Playmate in a Toyota. What would your friends think?
Look jokes aside, its a fact that Ford and GM are loosing market share. This market share is taken by Honda and Toyota. This means that current owners of Gm and Ford do not wish to purchase another domestic car and they purchase an import. This is a simple fact. If all owners of domestics again purchased a domestic there would not be any market share loss. Its that simple.
Now I am sure that Toyota does not give away a free Playmate with every Camry purchase, so they must have found another way to convince domestic owners that their cars are better. Build quality and resale value are two very convincing arguments to most people.
Lemme tell ya if they did the bimmer would be gone and I'd be frantically trying to explain my newtoy accompanying the ugly camry I bought.
Actually, all the domestics need to do to get me to buy an American brand is to make something that catches my eye more than its foreign competition. Now I know that probably doesn't sound hard to do, considering that I've only had domestics in the past. But the main things that would have traditionally kept me out of an imports were the size and the price. Usually domestics just gave you more bang, and more poundage, for the buck.
These days though, the Japanese make a whole slew of cars that fit me comfortably, while the domestics, oddly, seem to make fewer. And price-wise, they're much closer. For example, my old 1985 Consumer Guide has a test of a Camry and a Pontiac Parisienne. The Camry was fully-loaded and had a tepid 2.0 4-cyl, and a sticker price as tested of over $14k. The Parisienne stickered somewhere around $15K, and Consumer Guide said it was literally a lot of car for the money. There's no way in hell you could have convinced me in 1985 to fork over that kind of money for a Camry, versus a full-sized Pontiac! And they were just totally different cars.
Today though, a Camry really doesn't sticker (or TMV) for much more than a Malibu. And it's close enough in size, IMO, to be a worthy alternative to the larger Impala. For better or worse, times have changed.
As for that 1985 Parisienne - well, that's exactly the kind of car I'd go for!
Just about ALL domestic cars are more eye-appealing to me than anything Japanese. The Japanese cars, (and trucks) always had this bizarre look that reminded me of their weird movie monsters. Even bland cars like the Camry and Accord aren't free of this disturbing look. About the only car they make that I find remotely attractive is the LS430, probably because it apes a Mercedes S-Class so well.
Thanks.
Most of the development money went into trucks and SUVs. I think that its strange that Lincoln Town Car and Ford CV still have live rear axle while Explorer and Expedition have IRS. Does that even make sense to anyone here. A luxury car like Town Car riding on a solid rear axle, while a low level midsize SUV has independent rear suspension. Even the engines tell the story. Lincoln with an old 240 HP 2 valves engine while the Explorer gets the new 300HP 3-valve engine. I mean who thinks of this stuff at Ford? Hello McFly!!!
Lack of new platforms also tell the story. Look Ford cannot develop a new FWD platform by it self. Ford Taurus is still sold based on the old platform. The new Ford 500 is based on Volvo S80 platform, while Ford Fusion is based on Mazda 6 platform. So the last Ford NA platform developed in house is Taurus. This means that in 20 years Ford could not develop an in-house modern FWD platform. GM is no better in this regard. The All NEW Chevy Impala and Buick LaCrosse are both still riding on a modified W platform introduced in 1988 as Buick Regal. The New Buick Lucerne is still based on the old G-Platform which was introduced in 1995 as Old Aurora.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_G_platform
The minivan investment was even less from Ford and GM then sedans. Does Ford realy think that Ford Freestar is modern minivan that people would want to buy? Does GM realy think that grafting a big nose on an old minivan make it a better seller? The new GM minivans look like a Platypus. You would think that GM learned a lesson with Pontiac Aztec.
I do think that GM needs to develop a good RWD replacement platform for the G-platform. This was underway but the zeta platform was trying to cover too many different models to do any of them right.
Is the Malibu better than the Camry in the test drive?
Myself, I recently was in the market for a new car... and I wanted a small hatchback with good handling, good power, and seats that supported my back for about $20,000.
I narrowed the choices down to:
Ford Focus
Mazda 3
Volkswagen Golf (GTI)
Hyundai Elantra
Kia Spectra5
Pontiac Vibe (Toyota Matrix)
Suzuki Aerio SX
After test driving them, I had to eliminate the Hyundai, Kia, Suzuki, Pontiac/Toyota, and the Golf as they were all underpowered and had, in my view, poor handling.
The Ford Focus was chopped because of the hideously cheap interior.
So it boiled down to the Mazda3 and the Volkswagen GTI.
And they were nearly identical. However, I finally made my choice because I could not look over my shoulder and see into the blind spot in the Mazda3... so I bought the GTI.
Research-wise, the Mazda3 is actually a little better (pricing and passenger room), but the test drive came out in favor of the GTI.
So the Malibu may well be the better car on paper, but does the test drive bear that out?
The GM G-body platform that sls002 mentioned is a VERY sturdy platform. Nice, rigid, solid and safe. I think the problem ends up coming up in the details. trim pieces, interior parts, the occasional outdated engine, and so forth. The platform itself served as a very competitive basis, but then what GM did to it for the finishing touches often left something to be desired.
Another example is the W-body. If there's one thing my Dad's '03 Regal has going for it, is that it feels like a solid, substantial car. It's just in need of a nicer interior, better fit and finish, better suspension (to be fair, his is a base model) etc.
Supposedly the 1996 Taurus, ridiculed that it is, was a very solid platform when it debuted. I think NHTSA or one of those crash-test organizations said that it was one of the most solid, safe cars they'd tested up to that point.
I'm guessing that the problem is most likely that these cars get designed to a certain spec, but then the bean counters step in and start cutting costs, and the end result is somewhat less than what the original designers would have preferred.
FWIW, my VW ownership experience was not good. I'd still pick a VW product over a boring, low rent American car (is there another kind?).
I know what you are trying to say, but all of the Mopars of the 60's and beyond were unibody and many, even the full size ones, had the excellent slant six engine. I believe that the last v8 powered Mopar car was built in 1989.
I feel that the American consumer's tastes have moved away from what was considered an "American" car style (big, soft, inefficient, poor resale value) to the "Import" car style (smaller, tighter, more efficient, good resale value). This may be just a maturation of the consumer, but the Domestic auto makers had sure better catch up and give the consumer what they want.
Chrysler switched all of their cars except Imperial to Unibody for 1960, and Imperial switched for 1967. Most unitized cars don't forsake the frame completely, contrary to popular belief. While they don't have a full, separate frame underneath that the car body sits on, most of them still have to utilize a front sub-frame, which supports the engine and suspension, and a rear sub-frame, which supports the rear axle. While these sub-frames will differ from car to car, and among manufacturers, I think most unitized cars still have to make do with a sub-frame of some sorts.
Lemko, your 5th Avenue was unitized, although I don't know if Chrysler was still calling them "Unibody". It can be deceiving though to look up underneath one, because the beefy front and rear sub-frames to give the illusion of a body-on-frame car. The front sub-frame is also isolated from the body with these big rubber mounts, which are supposed to give the car a softer ride. Those isolated subframes can be troublesome though as the rubber mounts age and deteriorate. My '79 Newport had an isolated subframe too, and two of the mounts were just about gone. It really gave the car an uneasy feeling, because those rotten mounts would let the body shift about on the sub-frame when you went around corners, accelerated, braked, and such.
For some reason though, the problem was more rampant on the R-bodies than the M-bodies. If nothing else it was a learning experience. Before I bought my '79 NYer, the first thing I checked out was those sub-frame mounts!
I had another friend with a 2002 or so Jetta that dumped its load of coolant before he made the first payment on it.
Oh, how that bought back memories! A buddy of mine in high school had an ancient Dodge Dart with the pushbutton automatic transmission and the 225 slant six.
It always reminded my of "Dino" from the Flintstones when he started that car...(say it rapidly, in a high voice): ne, ne, ne, ne!
Wow, for you who are about to choose the S & M of VW we salute you........
Wow, for you who are about to choose the S & M of VW we salute you........
My BMW 330i has been far more unreliable than my Jetta ever was...and BMW's e90 is still the car to beat for my next purchase in May. Second car on the list - of those I've driven - is the A3. The 06/07 GTI when I get a chance to drive it will probably be no. 2 or no 3.
Not my fault Japanese and American cars are so boring. I'll take fun, nice and unreliable over boring, bland and reliable.
A little bit of pleasure and a lifetime of pain..... :sick:
Lets see, i slide into a car and turn it on. At this point, the drive should be a pleasure. I should be able to cruise at 95 mph to Vegas in serene comfort and get 30+ mpg. I should arrive and feel fine, rested, comfy.
Truth be told most cars that wouldn't happen. The ride wouldn't be smooth, secure, locked down and serene at 95 mph while giving me adequate power to pass and allowing me to maintain over 30 mpg. Most cars - japanese and american - simply don't feel rock solid and composed at those speeds and certainly not for 3-4 hours at a time.
Pain = driving a car that's boring, driving something that's loud, that feels floaty, that drifts at 100 mph plus, that doesn't offer supportive seating. Pain is not loving the driving experience.
I am talking about a modern FWD platform that can compete with Camry and Accord. I think every body here agrees that making small changes to an existing platforms will not save GM and will not stop it’s market loss. The main problem with current GM platforms is that they are simply not space efficient. The days of big on outside, small on inside designs are gone. GM has to come up with something a lot better then current cars to have any hope of survival. At least Ford understood that they have a problem and came up with two new platforms.
I think that Ford Fusion is a much much better product then Malibu and 500 is a much much much better product then LaCrosse.
GM has to understand one very simple thing. What they are doing now does not work. It’s a simple statement. If what they were doing worked, then they would not be in this mess. So they have to change what they are doing. Making small changes to existing cars and giving them new names is not going to cut it. GM needs to come up with a fresh approach. Look GM's fortunes stated to go down hill when they switched to FWD cars.
Why GM cannot build a decent RWD car. Yes I mean a proper Chevy Impala based on modified Sigma platform. I think that there would be many takers for a RWD Impala with V8 engine for $30K. This is something that Japanese just don't offer.
GM and Ford have to understand they cannot make a FWD sedan as good as Camry or Accord. It’s just not their cup of tea. So they have to make something truly American. To me a truly American car is a full size RWD V8 car that is affordable. I am talking about a GM version of Chrysler 300.